Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Ganesh Jairam Jagdale, a Tahsildar, challenged a common judgment dated 22/10/2020 of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, in Original Application No.597/2020. The petitioner was originally a Naib Tahsildar at Parseoni, then transferred to Kamptee on 1/7/2016, and later promoted and transferred to Sindewahi on 18/9/2019. On 9/6/2020, the petitioner himself requested a transfer from Sindewahi to Kamptee. Meanwhile, respondent no.4, Arvind Laxman Hinge, who was working as Tahsildar at Kamptee, had requested transfer from Kamptee to Nagpur on 30/3/2020. On 1/10/2020, the State Government issued a transfer order transferring 15 officers, including the petitioner from Sindewahi to Kamptee and respondent no.4 from Kamptee to Nagpur. Respondent no.4 challenged his transfer before the Tribunal, which by the impugned judgment set aside the transfer order and directed the State to reconsider the transfers. The petitioner, who was not a party to the original application but was affected, filed the present writ petition. The High Court held that the petitioner's transfer was on his own request and therefore he could not challenge it. The Tribunal's interference was unwarranted as the transfer was in accordance with policy and not mala fide. The High Court allowed the petition, setting aside the Tribunal's order to the extent it affected the petitioner, and upheld the transfer order dated 1/10/2020 insofar as it pertained to the petitioner.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Transfer - Government's Power - Transfer is an incident of service and the Government has the power to transfer an employee from one place to another in public interest. The Tribunal cannot substitute its own view in transfer matters unless the order is mala fide or violates statutory rules. (Paras 1-10) B) Service Law - Transfer on Request - Validity - When an employee makes a request for transfer and the same is accepted, the employee cannot later challenge the transfer. The petitioner's transfer from Sindewahi to Kamptee was on his own request and therefore cannot be assailed. (Paras 3-8) C) Service Law - Administrative Tribunal - Scope of Interference - The Tribunal's direction to reconsider the transfer of the petitioner was beyond its jurisdiction as the transfer was based on a request and was in accordance with policy. The High Court set aside the Tribunal's order to the extent it affected the petitioner. (Paras 9-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal was justified in setting aside the transfer order of the petitioner and directing reconsideration, and whether the petitioner's transfer was valid.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the Tribunal's judgment to the extent it affected the petitioner, and upheld the transfer order dated 1/10/2020 insofar as it pertained to the petitioner.
Law Points
- Transfer is an incident of service
- Government has power to transfer
- Transfer on request cannot be challenged
- Tribunal cannot substitute its own view in transfer matters
- Writ petition against Tribunal's order maintainable
